Salmon kill linked to level of Klamath / River's flow -- reduced for irrigation -- played a role in huge die-off, U.S. study finds

Glen Martin, Chronicle Environment Writer

Published
4:00 am PST, Wednesday, November 19, 2003

A long-awaited analysis from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has identified low water flows as a prime culprit in a major salmon kill on the Klamath River in 2002, but the federal agency that controls water levels on the Klamath stated the report would not necessarily result in more downstream releases.

The report said a combination of factors was responsible for the September disease epidemic that wiped out 34,000 chinook and endangered coho salmon in one of the country's largest fish kills.

Crowded conditions as the fish were migrating up the Klamath and its tributaries -- the 2002 salmon run was the eighth-largest between 1978 and 2002 -- were cited as a reason for the die-off, as was abnormally warm water,

caused at least in part by scorching late summer temperatures.

But the study also identified extremely low flows as a major factor in the kill. Downstream flows in the summer of 2002 were the fifth-lowest in the period between 1978 and 2002.

Environmentalists and fisheries advocates have argued that the Bush administration sets aside too much water for the irrigation of farmland in the Klamath River Basin at the expense of endangered fish species. Those groups said the report vindicated their claims that more water was needed. "Basically,

all the factors addressed in the report are directly related to flow conditions -- fish crowding and high water temperatures specifically," said Glenn Spain, northwest representative of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, a commercial fishing lobbying group.

"There are some long-term approaches we can take to solve this problem, such as restoring wetlands and buying water rights in the farmlands of the Upper (Klamath) Basin," Spain said. "But the one thing we can do immediately is put more water down the river. Fish and Wildlife is finally saying what we said all along -- fish need water."

But Dan Keppen, the executive director for the Klamath Water Users Association, a group that advocates for farmers in the river's upper reaches, said the report doesn't identify increased flows as a panacea for the Klamath's ills.

"There are individuals out there who want to believe that (federal water diversions for farmers) killed those fish," Keppen said. "They're desperate to cling to that myth. They demand more water, but ... I don't see how more water from the reservoir would've helped at that point."

At the heart of the controversy is the Klamath Project, an ambitious federal construction of dams, headgates and canals that delivers water to about 1,600 farmers cultivating approximately 200,000 acres of land in the Upper Klamath Basin, which straddles California's border with Oregon

Simply put, there isn't enough water in the sprawling but arid watershed to serve both fish and farmers optimally.

In 2001, basin farmers staged angry protests and seized irrigation headgates when the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the agency that controls the spigot on the Klamath system, curtailed water deliveries to agriculture to protect coho salmon and an Upper Klamath Lake sucker fish, both listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act.

Since then, the bureau has significantly increased deliveries to farmers, citing a National Research Council report that found no clear correlation between fish mortality and water levels in the Klamath system.

Salmon advocates hope the new Fish and Wildlife report, which buttresses an earlier report issued by the California Department of Fish and Game that reached many of the same conclusions, will give them the ammunition they need to wrest more water from the Bureau of Reclamation.

"This report gives us the piece of data that the National Research Council report lacked," said Kristen Boyles, an attorney with Earthjustice, an environmental group involved in the controversy. "It shows us what we can do right now to make sure something like this horrendous kill doesn't happen again, and that's increase the flows."

But the Bureau of Reclamation doesn't share Boyles' conclusion.

"Basically, the Fish and Wildlife report confirms the (National Research Council) report," said Jeff McCracken, a spokesman for the bureau. "It cites a multitude of factors, not an obvious single explanation, and I don't see where it says we should increase flows down the Klamath.

"The problem is that if we increase flows down the river, we have less water for the endangered sucker fish in Upper Klamath Lake."

Klamath Basin farmers generally support the bureau's current position and say any additional burden -- such as new water restrictions -- could put them out of business.

"It's disheartening to find that 80 years after this project was founded to help war veterans get a stake in farming, their descendants have become liable for habitat alteration," said Marshall Staunton, a partner in a 4,000- acre family agricultural operation.